lusterniafandomcom-20200216-history
Report 667
Report #667 Skillset: Starhymn Skill: CrusaderCanto Org: Cantors Status: Completed Sept 2011 Furies' Decision: We will increase the damage. Problem: Right now, this ability is almost completely useless. It deals, according to my testing on an enemy with no defenses or racial resistances, 95 damage at 1 level, 203 damage at 2 levels, and 295 damage at 3 levels of holy fire, and takes ten seconds to raise each level. Furthermore, to make use of this ability, we have to trigger it by dealing damage to the target, which sometimes means halting our offense just for the purpose of dealing a tiny bit of extra damage. The scaling of the damage on each level also doesn't incentivise storing up a full three levels before discharging it rather than just discharging it at level 1 each time, and changing that would make it something that has to be used more intelligently, rather than just a "fire and forget" approach. 0 R: 0 Solution #1: Change damage to 95 at level one, 240 at level two, and 470 at level three. Additionally, allow it to discharge against denizens to help with bashing. Optionally, also make it that when a Cantor has stored up the full three levels, give them a 33% chance to resist phobia-related afflictions (agoraphobia, vestiphobia, claustrophobia, hypochondria, omniphobia, and fear) in line with the 'valor and courage' theme of Methrenton. This would make it a choice to either leave the defense up or discharge it for an offensive effect. 0 R: 0 Solution #2: Keep damage as it is, but change it to deliver one affliction of increasing severity per level - sunallergy at level 1, ablaze at level 2, and epilepsy at level 3. Optionally, also make it that when a Cantor has stored up the full three levels, give them a 33% chance to resist phobia-related afflictions (agoraphobia, vestiphobia, claustrophobia, hypochondria, omniphobia, and fear) in line with the 'valor and courage' theme of Methrenton. This would make it a choice to either leave the defense up or discharge it for an offensive effect. 0 R: 0 Solution #3: Scrap the whole levels of holy fire thing entirely and just make having the effect imbued deal 200ish damage (50% Divinus, 50% Fire) to all undeaf enemies in the room every ten seconds. Alternatively, increase the damage and make it so that only one CrusaderCanto in a room can take effect at a single time. Player Comments: ---on 8/27 @ 05:46 writes: The main problem here is that we don't even have anything to imbue in the place of this ability. Since attempts at getting us new imbuable powers haven't really gone anywhere, we're forced to work on improving the abilities we do have. ---on 8/29 @ 13:45 writes: Another option could be to add a syntax for Cantors to make it an active release of damage. PLAY MINORSECOND CRUSADERCANTO or something to that effect which would allow them to choose when to discharge the extra damage. ---on 8/30 @ 12:50 writes: Or add a balanceless syntax to activate the charge, letting it proc on the next bit of damage dealt? ---on 8/31 @ 04:24 writes: If it's being changed to an active release of damage, it'd be preferable to just add a syntax to release the holy fire as its own attack that requires but does not consume balance. The solutions up above are already a little bloated, so: ---on 8/31 @ 04:24 writes: Solution #4: Solutions 1 or 2, but also change it to an active release through STARSONG CRUSADERCANTO or some similar syntax rather than a triggered release on any damage-dealing ability (as it currently is). This would require but not consume balance/equilbirium. ---on 9/1 @ 06:36 writes: Yes, making it require but not consume balance is a better option which I am happy with. ---on 9/20 @ 16:24 writes: I do not think any more afflictions are necessary. Does this not trigger when the aurics/angel hits the target? ---on 9/20 @ 21:08 writes: CrusaderCanto only triggers on damage, whether it's minorsecond, newbie punching, or even the passive damage from Rainbowpattern. If you don't think more afflictions are necessary, I'm assuming you're saying no to solution 2, but do you have any problems with solutions 1 or 3? (or 4?).